• 7 months ago
During Thursday’s oral arguments in Trump v. United States, Justice Neil Gorsuch questioned the attorney for Former President Trump D. John Sauer about private vs. official conduct.

Fuel your success with Forbes. Gain unlimited access to premium journalism, including breaking news, groundbreaking in-depth reported stories, daily digests and more. Plus, members get a front-row seat at members-only events with leading thinkers and doers, access to premium video that can help you get ahead, an ad-light experience, early access to select products including NFT drops and more:

https://account.forbes.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=display&utm_campaign=growth_non-sub_paid_subscribe_ytdescript


Stay Connected
Forbes on Facebook: http://fb.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/forbes
Forbes Video on Instagram: http://instagram.com/forbes
More From Forbes: http://forbes.com

Category

🗞
News
Transcript
00:00Well, on that score, there does seem to be some common ground between you and your colleague
00:06on the other side, that no man's above the law, and that the president can be prosecuted
00:13after he leaves office for his private conduct.
00:16Is that right?
00:17We agree with that.
00:18And then the question becomes, as we've been exploring here today a little bit, about how
00:22to segregate private from official conduct that may or may not enjoy some immunity.
00:29And I'm sure we're going to spend a lot of time exploring that.
00:34But the D.C. Circuit in Blazing Game, chief judge there, joined by the panel, expressed
00:41some views about how to segregate private conduct, for which no man is above the law,
00:48from official acts.
00:49Do you have any thoughts about the test that they came up with there?
00:53Yes.
00:54We think, in the main, that test, especially if it's understood through the lens of Judge
00:57Katz's separate opinion, is a very persuasive test.
01:00It would be a great source for this court to rely on in drawing this line.
01:04And it emphasizes the breadth of that test.
01:06It talks about how actions that are plausibly connected to the president's official duties
01:13are official acts.
01:14And it also emphasizes that if it's a close case, or it appears there's considerations
01:18on the other side, that also should be treated as immune.
01:21Those are the aspects of that that we'd emphasize as potentially guiding the court's discretion.
01:24And that left open, in that case, the possibility of further proceedings and trial.
01:31Exactly right.
01:32And that would be a very natural course for this court to take in this place.
01:35The court can and should reverse the categorical holding of the D.C. Circuit that there's no
01:39such thing as official acts, especially when it comes to—
01:42But you'd agree further proceedings would be required.
01:45That is correct.
01:46There would have to be, and I would point the court to Anderson against Creighton, where
01:48the court said there'd be kind of two stages of these further proceedings.
01:51There's looking at the indictment itself, or in that case it was a complaint, but look
01:55at the charging document itself and see whether, on the face of it, this is alleging official
01:59acts.
02:00And if not, or it can't be determined, then there'd be a factual proceeding.
02:03And all that, under Mitchell against Forsyth and so forth, would have to occur before any
02:07other proceedings in the district.

Recommended